On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 6:50 PM, Patrick Lauer <patr...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> I tried removing proxy-maint from metadata after multiple discussions > failed. Extra happiness towards monsieurp "but the GH PR is over 3 days > old, I have to commit" and gokturk "Yes I understand. I commit anyway" > > This has been an uphill struggle since about October, around New Year I > stopped actively caring, and since these two commits: > > 12c3eacda7c4d23686eaf10eab21d810cc95ea49 > f42d6679c038c3efcc257d38547267d01823aea9 > > I see no way to fix this situation that doesn't involve a review board in > front of all proxy-maint commits. Because we discussed this in IRC, and > still ... "but is open bug" > > However, as far as I'm aware none of this happened. Note that I might >> have missed the mail, or it might have been sent before I joined -- >> correct me if that is the case. >> > > There were multiple discussions in IRC, which the involved people usually > forgot within about 20 minutes and then resumed doing stuff. > > I tried removing proxy-maint from metadata, which was reverted (sooo how > does one *not* have constant interference?) > > As Alec pointed out, it is a normal procedure in Gentoo to remove old >> versions of software if there is no explicit indication that they need >> to be kept. Therefore, I don't see anything wrong with the proxied >> maintainer wishing to clean the old versions up and/or not requesting >> your explicit permission for that. If you needed the old versions, you >> should have made that clear. >> > > One could ask, maybe. I guess I can (mis)understand this to mean that I > can do with packages with you in metadata what I want because ... err... > shiny! > > I should also point out that the steps you've taken (and listed in this >> mail) are not really relevant. They make you look like a sloppy >> maintainer, and a bad Gentoo developer at the best -- and I doubt anyone >> would connect removing proxy-maint team with a necessity of keeping >> an old version. >> > > The cooperation that I had with ferki was pretty good (mostly because we > sat next to each other in the office). The contributions from Tomas were on > average pretty ok, just needed some minor cleanups here and there. > > The blind "but PR is open for 3 days" commits from proxy-maint made it > extremely hard to review what changed in a timely manner, so that I > basically didn't want to care for this pile of stupid for the last, ahem, 6 > months or so. Especially since whenever I wanted to review things some > joker made some new changes which made me go "eh whut how you? banana > banana!" so I pushed reviewing a week into the future and ... > > I have no idea how I could have fixed this without the QA+Comrel banhammer > combo, which is a totally insane "fix" to a problem that shouldn't even > exist. But I see no other options how to make people understand that "No > means no". > > Is this the new normal? > > Everybody makes mistakes, but let's look from another perspective. Elasticsearch 5.0 got released - a new major version. You did the bump, but it didn't work (it was clearly pushed to the repo untested as openrc/systemd version both failed: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=598732 https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=597454 Why didn't you fix it yourself? Same for logstash: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=597452 https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=598422 Why did you commit a broken ebuild to the repo and never fixed it after yourself? These bugs were open for weeks and months, not days...
